Travel insurance - worth paying more?

amictus

I'm looking for an annual travel insurance policy to cover a few trips that I'm planning this year.

I've just read through the MoneySavingExpert Travel Insurance Guide and got a couple of quotes with a couple of the providers mentioned.


Direct Travel Insurance
Standard policy - £53
Standard policy with optional natural disaster cover - £73
Excess £75
Policy details

[URL="http:///www.topnotchcover.com"]Top Notch Cover[/URL]
Silver policy (including catastrophe cover) - £35
Excess £65
Policy details


It looks as though the maximum cover amounts are comparable, but, in general, the Top Notch policy has lower excess levels. Other than this, the policies seem pretty similar. I'm assuming the Top Notch catastrophe cover is equivalent to the Direct Travel natural disaster cover.

So, is there any reason to choose Direct Travel over Top Notch? I assume that they would be more likely to pay out should I need to make a claim. Is this correct? If so, is it worth paying more?


Thanks!

cubegame

I wouldn't choose an annual travel insurance policy after recent experience. The cost savings are minimal compared to the additional problems caused when you book travel inside the period of insurance which commences afterwards.

We had to cancel a holiday last year which started after our insurance period ended due to an injury which occurred during the period of insurance. We were not able to renew due to this injury so it made the insurance useless.

jammin_2

cubegame wrote: »

I wouldn't choose an annual travel insurance policy after recent experience. The cost savings are minimal compared to the additional problems caused when you book travel inside the period of insurance which commences afterwards.

We had to cancel a holiday last year which started after our insurance period ended due to an injury which occurred during the period of insurance. We were not able to renew due to this injury so it made the insurance useless.

Eh?

What did you expect? To be covered for trip which was to occur after the policy expired? Come on!

cubegame

jammin wrote: »

Eh?

What did you expect? To be covered for trip which was to occur after the policy expired? Come on!

No, but I expect to be able to offered the choice of cancelling the holiday at the time of expiry of the insurance or being offered a renewal of the policy to cover the existing injury. This is the position the financial ombudsman recommends.

In my case, I cancelled and am still awaiting an ombudsman ruling 5 months later. I expect to get the money back but some people may not be able to afford this eventuality.

Therefore I don't believe annual travel insurance is a good product, regardless of cost.

luci

The Natural Catastrophe cover with Direct Travel is £6000. With Top Notch is appears to only be £500.

amictus

cubegame wrote: »

I wouldn't choose an annual travel insurance policy after recent experience. The cost savings are minimal compared to the additional problems caused when you book travel inside the period of insurance which commences afterwards.

If nothing else, I like the idea of not having to think about insurance if I want to get away for a quick break at short notice.

luci wrote: »

The Natural Catastrophe cover with Direct Travel is £6000. With Top Notch is appears to only be £500.

I hadn't realised there was such a big difference... thanks for point that out.

owains wrote: »

I assume that they would be more likely to pay out should I need to make a claim. Is this correct?

Can anyone confirm that that this is the main reason why a company would charge more for what appears to be less generous cover? Is it worth paying more for this extra "peace of mind"?

Spursman180

I always have rolling annual cover. I count it as a basic cost of doing business. I used to be covered by work and enjoyed significant discounts when I book personal TI. I've continued to book with them as I've had experience with the company on both sides of the fence, and seen how they have responded to people stuck for one reason or another. I've found their translation services good, their handling of clients who've been sitting in front of me at the time excellent, (seeing the steam subside from some very angry people and the fact that I was able to take an authorisation over the phone to do what it takes to put them back on the road (literally) helps turn calamity around.

It usually runs me over £100 a year but my piece of mind is total.

I can see the attraction of cheap insurance, but when is cheap too cheap?

The example above was an Italian family who drove to England to go to a wedding up north, they had set off in their absolutely brand new car which arrived outside on a tow truck having expired this side of the channel. They certainly drove over a 1,000 miles and had missed the first service by some distance, the key part of that service was an oil change to out in the normal grade after the car has been run in on a very light and not endurance grade oil. Our issue was had they blown the warranty as well as the engine? The insurers and the warranty people sorted it between them and we gave them a car to enjoy their trip and the car was ready for them on the way back, it took a new engine as that worked out cheaper than the repairs. I never heard if he blew that one on the way back?

Gloomendoom

owains wrote: »

Can anyone confirm that that this is the main reason why a company would charge more for what appears to be less generous cover? Is it worth paying more for this extra "peace of mind"?

I think the insurance guide actually mentions that paying more does not necessarily mean that an insurance company is more likely to pay out.

I've just got a quote from Top Notch. It looks good value... although some of the things that they regard as 'Hazardous Activities' are laughable. The list covers virtually everything that you might do between getting out of bed in the morning and getting back in again at night. What concerns me more is that, according to the 'help' notes on the web site, no public liability cover is provided for any 'hazardous activity'. One might expect bungee jumping and deep sea diving to be excluded, but beach games and bowling?????

I think I'll have to go over the policy document with a fine toothed comb before I commit.
.
.
.
.

tarkytarks

About the Natural Disaster Cover

I'm writing this as we were stuck in Vegas last year when the airspace was closed off so you could say "been there, got the t-shirt".

We're going away next week and I've decided that this time I'm not going to have natural disaster cover as part of our policy (an annual one - not a cheapie either). My reasons for this are that if you are already away when something major happens then the airline should be able to either sort you out in a hotel and provide meals or tell you to go off and find a hotel - this is the case if you have flown with an EU carier - this is what happened for us - we claimed everything back from Virgin afterwards. Yes it took ages (the claim was sent off in May and we got the money in August or September) but we did get the expenses back.

If you haven't flown yet, well you should get your money back or your trip/holiday dates moved (if you book your hotels seperately do it so you can still cancel them - just in case).

It's down to the indivudual to work out how reliable the company you are using is (lots of people had trouble with claiming back from some of the carriers).

We were lucky in that we could afford the extra week of expenses at the time, some are less fortunate. If you don't have a fall back of savings / credit card to use for (worst case £1-£2k) then maybe it's wise to go for this cover as an extra no matter which airline / holiday company you are with. However even in that situation you would still be claiming back the expenses from the insurer afterwards (I hope this is correct).

Anyway, when we ever fly anywhere with a non-EU airline or on a cheapie holiday that I don't quite trust to be helpful after they have our money I'll get natural disaster cover as an extra for peace of mind.

travellerboy

Natural disaster cover up to £6000. I'LL believe it when I see it, just like their delayed baggage up to £1500. When pressed about this cover it turned out to be only cover for essentials like underwear and a toothbrush. Expensive underwear !

Enterprise_1701C

Read in the paper today that there is a big volcano in Iceland revving up - they don't know if or when though!!!